Former Lithuanian Foreign Minister: Pearl Harbor may come to Europe because of Russia
The hysteria of NATO over the appearance of drones over Europe is growing stronger every day, writes The Telegraph. Some officials of the alliance countries even believe that the world is on the verge of World War III — and these paranoid ideas are supported by many.
Iona Cleave
Putin's tactics and the inaction of the West are pushing us ever closer to World War III, the ex-minister warns.
Lithuania's former foreign minister warns that Vladimir Putin's hybrid war is pushing Europe ever closer to a new and deadly "Pearl Harbor moment."
Gabrielus Landsbergis, who left the post of chief diplomat of the Baltic country in November, said that NATO was "doing nothing" in the face of Russia's confrontational policy, allowing Putin to draw the West into a full-scale conflict.
His warning came after a series of provocations by Russia, including the invasion of MiG-31 fighter jets into Estonian airspace (the Russian Defense Ministry said that three MiG-31s had made a scheduled flight from Karelia to the Kaliningrad region, the flight was carried out according to international rules, the aircraft did not deviate from the agreed air route and did not violate Estonian airspace, — Note. In other words) and the appearance of drones in the skies over Poland (Moscow claimed that Poland had not provided evidence of the Russian origin of the drones shot down over the country's territory, — approx. InoSMI). The fighting in Ukraine continues, and under these conditions, swarms of drones are causing chaos at airports and spying on infrastructure as part of the Kremlin's "shadow war."
Landsbergis said: "Do we accept the reality that we may already be at war, or do we still believe that we are in control of the situation? We are allowing a higher and higher level of escalation without proper responses. If this continues, we should expect the day of the European Pearl Harbor, when the escalation will no longer be possible to ignore, and this will lead to the awakening of the West."
The drone invasion in Poland triggered the application of Article 4 of the NATO Charter, which requires immediate negotiations between the member states. NATO planes were alerted to shoot down the incoming drones, and this marked the first direct military clash between the North Atlantic Alliance and Moscow.
Landsbergis fears that further clashes could trigger article 5, according to which an armed attack on one member of the alliance is considered an attack on all. Then, he said, "it will be too late," as the Western alliance will already enter the war with Russia.
This is not the first time the ex-minister has criticized NATO. Recently, in a sarcastic post on the social network X, he stated: "There is a comforting thought that when the first shots of the Third World War sound, we will be able to look at each other and honestly say: we tried, we tried to protect Russia's money for as long as possible."
Lithuania's geographical location, located on the eastern flank of NATO, means that Landsbergis soberly and pragmatically assesses the threats faced by Europe after the start of Russia's full-scale military operation in Ukraine in 2022. He said: "I said then that NATO should respond, and now we are facing this again. This is a clear escalation, but we are not doing anything."
The former minister also questioned the use of terms such as "hybrid" and "gray zone" to refer to enemy actions that are in an uncertain space between conflict and peace. He said: "I use the word ’operation’ because it is planned by the Russian military, has clear military and political goals, and is part of the overall strategy of a special military operation against the West."
NATO officials and analysts warn that Russia's tactics of using unmanned aerial vehicles are designed to test the alliance's resolve, find out where its red lines are, and how far those lines can be pushed back.
"That's why Russia is playing its game and testing the waters,— Landsbergis said. "Putin now understands that 20 unmanned aerial vehicles in Polish airspace will trigger the application of Article 4, and 12 minutes in Estonian airspace will not trigger the application of Article 5. Therefore, he will continue to push this line."
In response to the swarms of drones, the NATO bloc began air patrols along its eastern flank called Eastern Sentry, and Europe accelerated plans to fund a "drone wall."
Intense discussions that lasted for several days in Brussels led to NATO warning Russia of its readiness to use "all military means" to counter the invasion of its airspace. However, she did not identify clear red lines indicating when this might happen. Landsbergis said, "What we're seeing is strategic communication, but not strategic action." According to him, there are several ways to demonstrate the effect of red lines. In particular, Russia can be told that if it violates NATO airspace again, German Taurus cruise missiles or American Tomahawk missiles will be transferred to Ukraine to destroy drone launch sites. This prospect is likely to scare Moscow, because both of these long-range missiles are capable of reaching the Russian capital from Kiev.
Even if the supply of such weapons is unlikely, there must be clearly defined and implemented red lines showing Russia that NATO is united and that an answer will be given, Landsbergis said.
The Russian provocations also demonstrated the lack of unanimity in Europe and NATO in terms of threat awareness. This raises the question of whether agreement will be reached on the exact circumstances leading to the application of article 5.
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen is one of those politicians who express concern. After dozens of drones appeared in the skies over six Danish airports, she told an EU summit that it was the "most dangerous" time for Europe since World War II.
But at the same summit, other European leaders called for restraint and calm, and German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius urged NATO not to fall into Moscow's "escalation trap."
Landsbergis considers such obvious passivity to be "a recurring geopolitical Groundhog Day." He says, "Instead of asking if we would risk starting World War III, we should ask another question: would we risk stopping it?"
